Comments by "J Nagarya" (@jnagarya519) on "Judge rules Fani Willis can stay on Georgia election interference case" video.

Nope: he allowed it to play out PUBLICLY so the PUBLIC could see for themselves how the defense had NO CASE. Their star witness, fired for sexual assault, admitted under oath that he'd MADE UP the allegations -- he had NO EVIDENCE for any of it.
25
@martindread6530 The defense witness who talked about "phone records" backed off on the stand. He is the one who was fired for sexual assault, and he is pissed about that. His "facts" turned out to be revenge, not facts.
8
@tgray1 He also said there is no PROOF of conflict.
4
@dinahsoar6982 Another law-illiterate spews ignorant bigotry. This has nothing to do with "the bench". And one does not lose one's license based on APPEARANCE of conflict of interest -- especially when the judge ALSO held that there was no PROOF of conflict of interest. Citing only parts of facts is DISHONEST.
1
@tgray1 The case isn't tainted. And it will be tried before a judge and jury based on the facts and the law. As there always is, there will be disputes between the sides. But there's no relation to the facts and law of the case, and this smear job.
1
@tgray1 "Justice and the Rule of Law are to be ABOVE politics." -- john Adams. Learn to separate the two. As for the charges dismissed -- you OMIT that the judge ALSO said that the charges need more information, and then they can be refiled. Presenting only the part of the fact you like, and leaving out the part you don't like, results in you pushing the "public opinion" you WANT to happen. Leaving out part of the whole fact is dishonest. And that is the basis for your bias of pushing the POLITICAL, and to hell with facts and rule of law. I'm beyond fed up with law-illiterates REJECTING the rule of law in the name of a false "freedom". This is the fundamental principle by means of which the Founders refuted that delusion, from the 1784 New Hampshire constitution: "Part I--The Bill of Rights. "Article I. . . . . "III. When men enter into a state of society, they surrender up some of their natural rights, in order to insure the protection of others [AND OF THEMSELVES]". To make that more clear: EVERY right is inextricably entwined with RESPONSIBILITY. EVERYONE has the same rights, equally; therefore EVERYONE has the RESPONSIBILITY to LIMIT the exercise of their rights so as not to violate or infringe the rights of others. That is LAW, not politics. Ignorance of the law is a plague -- but is not an excuse. The Trump smear campaign, in the bogus form of a legal case that he did not win, has nothing whatever to do with the RICO case against him and his co-conspiring fellow criminals.
1
@tgray1 We adjudicate legal matters in the judicial branch -- in courts of law -- not in the vigilante "court" of public opinion. Trump continues to lose in court because ALL of what he is doing through his lawyers is POLITICS. AGAIN: "Justice and the Rule of Law are to be ABOVE politics." -- John Adams. Those who insist on playing politics with the rule of law do so because they REJECT the rule of law. They defend criminality and criminals. And how often do those same people invoke the Constitution -- which they can't be bothered to actually READ -- the Supreme Law of the Land in defense of their REJECTION of it?
1
He allowed the defense and its witnesses to PUBLICLY shoot themselves in their feet.
1
@oceanhome039 This judge has been excellent.
1
@mainely8007 And it was important that THE PUBLIC be allowed to see the entire issue play out so they wouldn't have anything to whine about -- except by lying.
1
@seanscanlon9067 He allowed the defense's star witness to testify -- and he turned out to be a vengeful bust who admitted under oath that he actually had no evidence for the allegations he had made. The entire defense charade was the usual Trump racist mud-slinging. That taint is entirely from and on Trump and the other criminals charged.
1
@tevandorian1744 Everything, as usual, was made up by Trump in pursuit of his usual name-calling and smears. The issue had no EVIDENCE underlying it; at minimum it was yet another delay tactic based on his LYING.
1
@samadams7224 When will you liars learn to BACK UP your allegations with EVIDENCE?
1
@StateXStateAmendmentOne When will you HATERS LEARN to back up your allegations with EVIDENCE -- OR to STOP the LYING?
1
@chucktaylor9190 Los of crybaby Trumpers because the entire fraudulent defense effort was an absolute bust. As with the Comer-Gym Jordan "impeachment" effort, whose star witnesses turned out to be assets working for Chinese and Russian intelligence services, the star witness turned out to be a sexual assaulter who admitted, under oath, that he hadn't a shred of EVIDENCE for the allegations he had made. "Justice and the Rule of Law are to be ABOVE politics." -- John Adams. You wall in the cesspool politics of domestic enemies.
1
@2share572 Try that again, but after you learn basic literacy in English.
1
@fenderbassfan Your bias against the rule of law is not legitimate and does not qualify as literacy in law and legal process. There is no conflict of interest, in view of the fact that since the outset, and in keeping with THE RULE OF LAW, the judge is assigned to oversee Fani Willis' prosecution. Clue: just because Trump feeds you suckers lies does not mean his lies are TRUE. Trump is attacking the rule of law itself. YOU have RIGHTS because they are secured IN RULE OF LAW. He couldn't less about you -- LOOK AT THE FACTS: 1. He put many hundreds of his supporters IN JAIL. 2. He's TALKED about pardoning" them -- but between January 6th and the Biden inauguration he could have pardoned them. But he didn't because he DOESN'T CARE about them OR YOU. All you are to him is a source of $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$. Ask yourself: Why does he need to pick your pocket if he is the mega-billionaire he CLAIMS to be?
1